Atheist Debates – Argument from Contingency

Atheist Debates – Argument from Contingency

Part of the Atheist Debates Patreon project: http://www.patreon.com/AtheistDebates

In the realm of cosmological arguments, arguments from contingency are less typical than first-cause arguments or the Kalam cosmological argument, but it plays to the heart of our curiosity over why there is something instead of nothing.

14,698
Like
Save

Comments

Cryogenic Vortex says:

If we define god just as "explanation for the universe's existence", then god might be real, given that explanation for the universe exists. The problem is that all this deistic/christian additional baggage about non-physical woo-woo doesn't necessarily apply, if we just follow the definition.

munstrumridcully says:

Nothingness may well be physically impossible. It may well be that something exists because, physically if not logically, must exist. Rather than being intrinsically unstable, which IMO reifies nothing, I think it is more parsimonious that nothingness is physically impossible. Even the absence of anything is something, its the absence of anything. To me, nothingness is only a concept and existence being eternal.

Clemente de la Cuadra says:

If you tell me "you can't reach me because the distance between us can be divided by two, each half in two, and so on, so there are infinite distance "bits" you must go thru and you'll never get here", I would reply by punching you in the nose. A philosophical argument will not repair a tire's puncture; some basic tools will. A bolt will break when you tighten it over its tensile strength limit. Those are facts, and they work. I guess I can't escape being a tech. Them Creats use those convoluted metal schemes because they do not have FACTS. Give me an ugly fact over a ton of mental conundrums any time …

Erol Bafto says:

I wish there was a Muslim version of you.

Peter says:

I wonder if calling it "Argument from Dependency" would not have been a better choice of words.

Paul MacArthur says:

Atheists want to see everything but what if God is invisible. There are things we believe but we have never seen e.g. Saten who was condemned.

John Camacho says:

This is why most, if not all arguments for the existence of God need to also define God. How can we talk about the existence of XYZ when we don't know what XYZ is? Is God fallible? Disfunctional? Or is he omnipotent, omnipresent and immutable? Does God interfere with the universe? Or does he leave it alone?

LMcAwesome says:

2:30 – used a word as part of the description of a word. Poor form. "contingency is when something is contingent on something else".

Thomas Bridgewater says:

I disagree with the contingent and necessary dichotomy. Why can't something exist without being caused and it be possible that it did not exist? If that could happen, then that thing is not necessary and also not contingent.

demomanchaos says:

"The universe exists, therefore god is the reason."
Why can't the reason be because Voltron action figures? There is just as much evidence to support the belief the universe exists for Voltron action figures as there is for a god being the reason (more so because we can show that Voltron action figures are actually real, can't say the same for a god), so why don't we argue that Voltron action figures are the reason the universe exists instead?

Lorne Dmitruk says:

It seems the argument from contingency is contingent on flawed logic.

Marc Soucie says:

I don't think it is counter-intuitive to imagine an eternal thing being contingent on another eternal thing. To follow Matt's example of the sun an it's light, one could imagine a sun which has existed eternally. The light flowing from the sun would eternally be contingent ("sustenance contingency") on that sun. Of course we have no example of eternal contingencies (that I can think of…) but I don't think it is contradictory.

Giorgos Avraam says:

the big band theory just happened because it just happened?
matter just poped up out of nowhere because it just happened? something was created out of nothing because it just happened?
seems logical… then if i close the palm of my hand and say the word bang… nothing appears because im… human or it just didn't happen?
but hey in the end of the day, only the dead discovered the truth.
or not.

Vincent Deporter says:

Brilliant.

Comments are disabled for this post.